I agree that it could spark a blood feud if they were just family pets, but I used to have a dachshund who could kill a sparrow in mid-flight. That dog was a stone cold killer. Scale it up to a collie and you're lookin' at baby alpaca in danger and mommas losing their... foal? What the hell is a baby alpaca called?

I'm reserving judgement until I hear both sides. THEN I'll overreact and rain hyperbole down like it was mere exaggeration.

These dogs did not escape because of neglectful owners, their fence had been damaged in the night, they did not realize this until minutes after they noticed the dogs went missing.

-So they did not leave a gate open, or let the dogs roam loose... the dogs escaped because their fence had been damaged in the night.

These dogs were not nuisance dogs responsible for killing his sheep or alpaca at any moment, nor did they have a history of escaping and intruding on his property.

The Sheep were in an enclosure, this enclosure was not accessible to the dogs without human assistance. They were lead into the enclosure, then executed. They were not chasing his sheep randomly in an open field, they were given entry for the purpose of their disposal by Mr. Poletti.

I believe in the right of farmers and people who own livestock or anyone threatened bby dogs running wild to be able to protect that property as needed. The PA law in question has some language that could be altered but the premise of the law is good.

IMPORTANT ELEMENT:The dogs were given entry to the sheep pen, thus creating an environment where they could be executed justifiably by Mr. Poletti. This is not in the spirit of this law, in fact the law does not allow for this. This man gave entry to the dogs for the purpose of executing them. This is why his actions are heinous, then he followed up by leaving a message for the family. Which is a great way to know that this person is a scumbag.

His anti dog bias may come from previous experience where his sheep, that he cares for and raised were killed, for that I have sympathy and would understand. However, these dogs did not threaten his sheep until he allowed them entry to their enclosure. Basically the man hates dogs, i guess any dogs, as he took his neighbors dogs and set them so he could "legally" execute them. Then he goes on to taunt the family.

i upped my meds-up yours:jso2897: So another asshole exercises his "rights" without stopping to think whether what he is doing is actually right or not.As a consequence, restrictive laws will be made, and people will have slightly fewer rights.Assholes ruin everything for everybody - just by being dicks when they don't have to.

If I can't be a dick when I don't have to, the concept of "rights" has no meaning and we'd better have done with it.

Oh you're cute

Now, if you think you do have rights, I have one last assignment for ya. Next time you're at the computer get on the Internet, go to Wikipedia. When you get to Wikipedia, in the search field for Wikipedia, i want to type in, "Japanese-Americans 1942" and you'll find out all about your precious farking rights. Alright. You know about it.In 1942 there were 110,000 Japanese-American citizens, in good standing, law abiding people, who were thrown into internment camps simply because their parents were born in the wrong country. That's all they did wrong. They had no right to a lawyer, no right to a fair trial, no right to a jury of their peers, no right to due process of any kind. The only right they had was...right this way! Into the internment camps.Just when these American citizens needed their rights the most...their government took them away. and rights aren't rights if someone can take em away. They're priveledges. That's all we've ever had in this country is a bill of TEMPORARY priviledges; and if you read the news, even badly, you know the list get's shorter, and shorter, and shorter.Yeup, sooner or later the people in this country are going to realize the government doesn't give a fark about them. the government doesn't care about you, or your children, or your rights, or your welfare or your safety. it simply doesn't give a fark about you. It's interested in it's own power. That's the only thing...keeping it, and expanding wherever possible.

Funny, 'friendly dogs' is how rottweilers are often described by their owners. They may be friendly to you but that doesn't mean they're friendly to me. Opinions vary. Don't like a your dogs being shot? Don't let them out. Build a better fence or get a stronger chain.

kortex:R. Paulson: kortex: Meatschool: kortex: I would love to shoot all the dogs around my house. If I lived in the country, I'd shoot any dog that came on my property. They are noisy, shiat everywhere and consume too much food that could go other places.

Dang dude. I'm on the farmer's side in this thing, live in the country, and *I* think the above statement is just dickish. Go troll somewhere else.

Not trolling at all. Dogs are a large useless waste of resources. If people did not keep unnecessary pets: less cattle, hogs and chicken would have to be raised. The impact would be astounding. I would definitely shoot your stupid dog.

Tatterdemalian:The Snow Dog: The great thing about being human is that we have brains we can use t o make decisions with. If you don't want to use yours, great. But you do n't have to make up stuff. Just say: Dogs were on my property, I felt like killing them. Don't act like you're a hero.

Sadly, the problem with being human is that if you're not a hero, you're a villain that will quickly be subject to the modern equivalent of the Salem Witch-Burning Team. Which you seem intent on rallying, to prove my point.

/and shooting the dogs was still the correct decision//just because you think the Disney Universal Animal Language exists doesn't mean it's more real than any invisible sky wizard

It may have been; it may not have been. I don't think it was the correct decision. And your assertion that I think of things in Disneyesque scenarios is laughable. I grew up hunting and have been around ranches and guns my entire life. I've seen ranchers that had mean dogs that had to be taught to stay away from livestock. I've had black labs that we took to hunting leases that would run and sniff every cow or goat in a quarter-mile of the main house. Nobody ever got all-fired up to put a bullet in their heads because they were doing no harm.

You're saying those happy, investigative dogs should have been shot.

I'm saying that you should take each case and make a decision as to whether there is any real threat before you go blowing sh*t up. It MIGHT have been the correct decision. It MIGHT not've.

zenferret:The Snow Dog: If you'll read the comments above you'll see I said that, if the dogs actually were attacking the livestock, then good for the farmer for protecting his livestock. I also said you'd be the pentultimate douche if the dogs were just in there sniffing around or playing and you walked up and shot them. We'll never know unless there is security camera footage we don't know about.

It's actually irrelevant. The dogs were in the pen with the sheep. This is obviously upsetting to the livestock.

The Snow Dog: If you're the type of ferretty douche that would leap at the chance to get in some sweet, sweet dog-killing just because they dare tread on your property: then fark you in the goat-ass.

Oh, so he should have waited until the dogs actually began attacking the sheep? That makes YOU the douche, sir. Do you let your kids play with a gun right up until they shoot themselves with it, too?

2. If the dogs were already in the pen and they were not attacking or acting aggressively then they would likely not attack the sheep. You ever seen a dog get into it with something? They usually make a bee-line towards whatever they're getting into it with and jump on it. Sometimes there's a face-off before the attack if it's something like a dog or badger or something, or in the case of a sheep-like animal that animal may try to flee and will trigger an attack reflex. Most of this is going to happen relatively quickly, though.

Also, the fact that the guy used a single-shot shotgun means that:A. The dogs likely weren't attacking his sheep or he would've likely hit his sheep. (It's a shotgun.)B. He had time to kill one dog and reload before he killed the other dog. If the other dog had been attacking it must have been really slow, as over all this elapsed time it still hasn't made it tothe sheep it's attacking.

And some of your compadre's arguments that the dogs scaring the sheep can cause all kinds of health and pregnancy problems---LOL!--what the fark do you think blowing off shotgun blasts into their midst will do? Make them calm and fart rainbows?

NOVanHelsing:The Snow Dog: Sure thing. It's your right to eat your own dingleberries too. Doesn't mean you have to do it, dingleberry-breath These animals I keep to provide sustinace and profit are my responsibility. They are, for the most part, confined for their own protection. If you fail to control your animal and it leaves your property and comes into my livestock pens or coop then you sir are responsible for any actions I must take to protect my livestock. That you fail to comprehend this simple fact amazes me.

NOVanHelsing:The Snow Dog: If the dogs were not attacking the sheep then the guy is a complete douchebag.

I know this may surprise you but is it not necessary for the offending animal to be "attacking the livestock" in order for me the livestock owner to dispatch said animal. That the animal is spooking is provocation enough. The stress of having a predator in their midst will/can cause the livestock to stop producing that which they produce. This is the reason for laws such as these.

Sure thing. It's your right to eat your own dingleberries too. Doesn't mean you have to do it, dingleberry-breath.

syzygy whizz:TheJoe03: It's why I don't trust people who hate dogs and/or would treat them poorly. Unless you have an allergy or a dog attacked you or hurt someone you loved, it's a sign you're a bad person.

offmymeds: AverageAmericanGuy: Keep your dogs on leash.

The deaths of these two dogs are on the owner that let them run free.

lucksi: Don't let your farking dogs roam around freely

They weren't "running around freely". They were fenced in, but escaped. Read this article from Philly.com. It's better written and will give you a better idea of what exactly happened.

This is why I am not fond of dogs. Two of them (not for the first time) escaped from their enclosure and killed my oldest cat. In his OWN yard. One dog, maybe he might have gotten away, but with two he didn't have a chance.My 'gun' was the animal control unit...the dogs were euthanized eventually.

The Snow Dog:If the dogs were not attacking the sheep then the guy is a complete douchebag.

I know this may surprise you but is it not necessary for the offending animal to be "attacking the livestock" in order for me the livestock owner to dispatch said animal. That the animal is spooking is provocation enough. The stress of having a predator in their midst will/can cause the livestock to stop producing that which they produce. This is the reason for laws such as these.

cuzsis:It sounds like it's very likely these dogs were harrassing the livestock. Unfortunately that can happen when you keep a predator as a pet.

As far as "scaring" them off, I don't know if you've ever tried it, but when a dog is in "predation" mode not much registers beyond his immediate focus. Maybe, *maybe* if you chucked a big enough rock into his backside he might look up at you...before going back to doing what he was doing. I suppose there are a few dogs out there that might stop and come in, but most of them are pretty intense.

And good luck with running them down. Even a basset hound can out run a human.

There usually aren't many good options in this case. It generally sucks all the way around.

/damn.

Even folks who Hunt (horses, fancy clothes, hounds) carry a pistol loaded with buckshot in case they need to get a dog's attention.Once they're focused on a scent, it's tunnel everything (i.e., vision, scent, sound)...but they're still open to an ass full of buckshot.

I agree that it could spark a blood feud if they were just family pets, but I used to have a dachshund who could kill a sparrow in mid-flight. That dog was a stone cold killer. Scale it up to a collie and you're lookin' at baby alpaca in danger and mommas losing their... foal? What the hell is a baby alpaca called?

I'm reserving judgement until I hear both sides. THEN I'll overreact and rain hyperbole down like it was mere exaggeration.

Baby alpacas are called crias. They also scare the shiat out of you when you're doing chores and they start falling out of the mom's ass when you aren't expecting it. [Source] My aunt and uncle raise alpacas in Wisconsin.

I agree that it could spark a blood feud if they were just family pets, but I used to have a dachshund who could kill a sparrow in mid-flight. That dog was a stone cold killer. Scale it up to a collie and you're lookin' at baby alpaca in danger and mommas losing their... foal? What the hell is a baby alpaca called?

I'm reserving judgement until I hear both sides. THEN I'll overreact and rain hyperbole down like it was mere exaggeration.